And here, by the way, not so much an ethical issue arises, but a moral one. Because many will say that even though this person is digital, he is still a person and just like a living one, which means he needs to be cherished and not subjected to any torture or simply experiments. Because it’s immoral!
It’s just that now you have to figure out how a person living in a computer program differs from a person living in this world. Can he experience feelings? He certainly can; he is programmed to do so, but, damn, how can I put it? A real person feels things in real life, and there, it turns out, not in real life, until he is transferred into a biological body.
And also, if you put a cool hacker into a computer, he might be able to understand it and even figure out how to influence the computer’s operation, if that’s even theoretically possible.
Stop. If a person is put into some device that converts him into a digital form, he might… He might then live his whole life in paranoia, thinking that the world around him is created by a computer, that he is actually running in a program right now, and that he is not really living. Hmm, interesting, a great plot for a movie or book.
I don’t even know how to solve this problem. You could erase a small piece of memory in which the person was put into the digitization device, but what would that give? If you do that, he won’t even know that he has a copy, and if you tell him about it – now or sometime later – paranoia might still appear. You could come up with some kind of clear identifier that should appear after digitization, but in that case, it could be simulated in the program as well. Damn, what should we do then?
